And the last thing I have to say, and what I am going to say goes well for most of people's contemporary attitudes about most of the material we consume, and that is, we look and value stories by their content. But there is a sense that you get with each event that he constructs beautifully. You don't always understand what is occurring in a "this is coming together kind of way" to point to a realization about the character or about life. Murakami creates, instead, a feeling that is tied to the environments of his characters. Much of the literature we read has something telling or something directly communicable. Just like Virgina Woolf wrote stories that have absolutely no plot, which was unheard before her doing so. Furthermore, I don't believe Murakami is popular for writing books that are "telling" and that's the beauty of his writing.
But, to get a better understanding of Kafka on The Shore you have to read two of his other books, Hard Boiled Wonderland, and The Wind-up Bird Chronicle. That plane of thinking is never clearly defined.
Why do you need to gain per-se at all? Kafka on the shore can't be fully understood because the author draws from many metaphysical sources. Why do you need to gain per-se at all? Kafka on the shore can't be fully understood because the a …more I think you need to back up a bit in your reasoning. Christopher Weil I think you need to back up a bit in your reasoning.
0 kommentar(er)
